Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-traini

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Re: Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-tr

The reason I have never heard of this game is that Pokemon is the only RPG I play. Besides, I never owned a gameboy and as there is no Nintendo Store anywhere where I live, I have never seen it. I'm mostly into RTS games anyway.

 

[System Error]

Re: Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-tr

Not quite sure what I'm more surprised at.

- That somebody else here has played Jade Cocoon.
- That the hint at what's next wasn't obvious enough.

For the curious, I basically have down a list of games where you can train monsters, and only set the order in stone one ahead at a time. TFFL seemed like the only logical first of the series, due to how it helped get Pokemon made. And there was only one logical second one after that.

You may want to instead hunt down SaGa 2/FFL2, which sanded out many of the rougher problems with the systems in the first SaGa (not to mention introducing robots; when they equip something, that something's maximum charges get permanently halved, but they won't break, instead now treated like a mutant/esper's special powers). There was even a remake for the DS, but given how the most recent non-remake SaGa games had failed so horribly on this side of the Pacific, no attempt was made to port it over.

You're focusing on how Robots get rechargable uses of equipment? I mean, it's a damn fine selling point, especially with exotic weaponry, but I prefer how they get stats from equipment, and there is no cap on it. > TFFL is good in its own right, though. I was actually going to do the first two together, but ultimately decided to just do the first one due to the transformation systems and abilities being handled fairly different. Not quite sure what to do with it now.

The reason I have never heard of this game is that Pokemon is the only RPG I play. Besides, I never owned a gameboy and as there is no Nintendo Store anywhere where I live, I have never seen it. I'm mostly into RTS games anyway.

If we're lucky, it'll get released on the GBStore for 3DS.

Neat little story I didn't have a place to mention - I only really got into the original because I lost FFL2 when sleeping in a trailer at my aunt's. I wasn't given time to look for it before I had to leave with my family, and so I got stuck with the first. Which ended up growing on me over time.

 

[Miar]

Re: Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-tr

For the curious, I basically have down a list of games where you can train monsters, and only set the order in stone one ahead at a time. TFFL seemed like the only logical first of the series, due to how it helped get Pokemon made. And there was only one logical second one after that.

Already have one, sorta. (warning: Trope link) TFFL/SaGa isn't there, by the way.

One contrast is that the general idea behind 'Mons and 'Mon games is collecting and summoning creatures to fight for you. From the way the game looks, SaGa has you fighting alongside them, so it's not a full-blown mon series.
Still, Tajiri-sama was influenced by it among all RPGs, so it isn't without its similarities. And the game looks good for its time, but I don't have a GBA anymore, nor could I probably find one of those cartridges if I tried.

Technically, Shin Megami Tensei (specifically this one) launched the game genre in 1987, but long before that there was a card game. Since then, there've been a crapton of variants as seen above. I've played Mega Man Battle Network/Star Force and Dinosaur King, and I've watched Digimon episodes from various seasons. They're each unique and good in their own right.

 

[SkyknightXi]

Re: Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-tr

If I remember correctly, Digimon started with Tamagochi-style objects, so it definitely wasn't a follow-the-leader situation in either direction.

System Error: More like I completely forgot about the stats-from-equipment. It's been THAT long since I played SaGa 2...

 

[Gligar13]

Re: Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-tr

Digimon was originally a Tamagotchi Spinoff (look at the early logo). The early games (like the Sega Saturn and early Wonderswan games) reflected this, as they were V-Pet sims.

 

[Keiya]

Re: Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-tr

For some reason, this article caused my mind to play the "Savages" song from Disney's Pocahontas. I have no clue why.

My favorite non-Pokemon monster game (which I've never even played, I just love the idea) is probably Monster Rancher. Using CDs to create monsters? Awesome!

Of course then CD burners came and made cheating that waaayyy to easy...

 

[Te-em]

Re: Compare and Contrast: The Final Fantasy Legend: Pokémon isn't the only monster-tr

I have this game and also noticed the similarities to Pocket Monsters. Also wondered if this game is where they got Red Orb and Blue Orb from (if there possibly are such item in Pocket Monsters, if I remember right).

I wish there were more monster-training like Pocket Monsters, but everytime such a game appears, game magazines and people say its a rip-off, even about Dragon Quest Monsters, when Pocket Monsters actually "stole" from Dragon Quest in the first place.

I noticed when I played a Final Fantasy game, FFIV I think it was, that you could be a Trainer. I never checked what it meant, though.

It is true that monster-training will seem like rip-offs of Pocket Monsters at first, but Final Fantasy was the same of Dragon Quest, yet today they have gone separate ways and there are even other RPGs of this kind than these, where Pocket Monsters itself is a branch. I think Pocket Monsters will also be a better game if Game Freak has to compete with other game developers of monster-training games, but no other monster-training seems to be famous enough.